0-60mph back down to 0 = X feet

  • Thread starter Thread starter sapple
  • Start date Start date
AI Thread Summary
The discussion revolves around calculating the total distance required to accelerate from 0 to 60 mph and then decelerate back to 0 mph. Given a 0-60 mph time of 6.7 seconds and a 60-0 mph distance of 112 feet, the total distance is estimated to be around 448 feet when accounting for reaction time and average velocity. The calculations rely on the assumption of constant acceleration and deceleration, with considerations for tire friction coefficients. There is uncertainty regarding the legal implications of these calculations, particularly in proving recklessness. The user seeks to demonstrate a total distance greater than 500 feet for their court case.
sapple
Messages
5
Reaction score
0
Acceleration... HELP! ASAP

I am going to court tomorrow for a trafic citation and need to figure out the following

0-60mph back down to 0 = X feet


information i have:

0-60 = 6.7 sec

60-0 = 112 ft
 
Physics news on Phys.org
As I see it, your calculation depends on the coefficient of friction for your tires, which varies widely for peeling out and skidding vs "normal" driving. I am not a lawyer, but I believe such a calculation is not easily proven. Perhaps if you take the limiting case of the static(?) coefficient of friction for the maximum acceleration allowed, at least you might argue against reckless driving (peeling out or skidding). Also, in that case, the equality of maximum acceleration and deceleration would yield tacc=tdec for elapsed time and Xacc=Xdec for distance covered. If you have skid marks, you must know the kinetic(?) coefficient of friction for your tires, which can have substantial wiggle room, although the police may have standard calculations for determining infractions.
 
Last edited:
holy sH#T, I should have mentioned that am i am only 17 and struggling to pass my alg trig class. I think i under stood two words!

Also the take off was normal, no burn out/ wheel spin
 
Last edited:
Assuming constant and equal acceleration from zero to sixty and equal deceleration from sixty to zero

a=2X/t2=86.5 ft/s2

Whether this acceleration/deceleration is reckless, ask the experts - the police! There is no definite "acceleration limit" that I know of.
 
this is what i got from a friend
From Road & Track Cayman test (Jan. 07) the base Caymn goes 60mph to 0 in 110ft.

60 Mph = 88 ft/sec. figure 1/2 sec for reaction time = 44 ft. so we are up to 154 ft.

Now for the acceleration. Assume that it is constant so velocity v(t) = (88.0/6.7) * t

So the distance is d(t) = ((88.0/6.7) * t * t )/2 at t= 6.7 sec. d = 44.0 * 6.7 = 294 ft.

Another way to think of this is that the average velocity is half of the max velocity = 88.0 / 2 = 44 ft/sec. then the distance is 44.0 * 6.7 – same answer as the integration of the velocity equation.

So we get 294 + 154 = 448 ft. total
 
i need to figure out away to make my distance>500ft
 

Thread 'Errors and significant figures'

I multiplied the values first without the error limit. Got 19.38. rounded it off to 2 significant figures since the given data has 2 significant figures. So = 19. For error I used the above formula. It comes out about 1.48. Now my question is. Should I write the answer as 19±1.5 (rounding 1.48 to 2 significant figures) OR should I write it as 19±1. So in short, should the error have same number of significant figures as the mean value or should it have the same number of decimal places as...
View full post »
Thread 'Collision of a bullet on a rod-string system: query'

Thread 'Collision of a bullet on a rod-string system: query'

In this question, I have a question. I am NOT trying to solve it, but it is just a conceptual question. Consider the point on the rod, which connects the string and the rod. My question: just before and after the collision, is ANGULAR momentum CONSERVED about this point? Lets call the point which connects the string and rod as P. Why am I asking this? : it is clear from the scenario that the point of concern, which connects the string and the rod, moves in a circular path due to the string...
View full post »
Thread 'A cylinder connected to a hanging mass'

Thread 'A cylinder connected to a hanging mass'

Let's declare that for the cylinder, mass = M = 10 kg Radius = R = 4 m For the wall and the floor, Friction coeff = ##\mu## = 0.5 For the hanging mass, mass = m = 11 kg First, we divide the force according to their respective plane (x and y thing, correct me if I'm wrong) and according to which, cylinder or the hanging mass, they're working on. Force on the hanging mass $$mg - T = ma$$ Force(Cylinder) on y $$N_f + f_w - Mg = 0$$ Force(Cylinder) on x $$T + f_f - N_w = Ma$$ There's also...
View full post »

Similar threads

0-60mph back down to 0 = X feet
Replies
1
Views
1K
An outsider begging for assistance - motorcycle acceleration
Replies
7
Views
2K
Solving for Time When a Ball is Dropped 85 Feet
Replies
8
Views
4K
Average Net Force on a Car 0-60mph: Weight Comparison
Replies
1
Views
4K
Average velocity when the interval has a domain
Replies
7
Views
2K
Analyzing Bridge Circuit w/ Loop Currents
Replies
6
Views
1K
Bead sliding along wire with constant horizontal velocity -- Shape of wire?
Replies
2
Views
1K
Age of radioactive sample, single variable equation.
Replies
4
Views
2K
What is the maximum height of the stadium at its back wall?
Replies
4
Views
18K
Center of mass and momentum- A question about systems
Replies
25
Views
1K

Hot Threads

Recent Insights

Back
Top